What can our movement do to impose term limits on Congressmen and Senators?

[Akus]

I see the fact that our Congressmen and Senators can have their respective offices for their entire lives and the fact that, according to Wiki (yeah yeah I know, the most reliable source of information in the world), the average age of these people is in their 60s.

We can't promote our agenda with the stale Congress and Senate, even as we can't promote it with the old Congress and Senate. I am not at all saying that we should put teenagers on the Capitol Hill, but I do see this as a major deterrent to our cause.

I understand that Congressmen and Senators will have to vote on limiting their terms and, for obvious reasons, they vote against that. I see this as a dangerious gridlock with no solution as far as I can see.

What say you?
What can we do about that?

[JoshLowry]

Rand Paul said the first thing he would do as a Senator is introduce an amendment to the Constitution that would impose term limits.

That's one route... :)

[Akus]

Rand Paul said the first thing he would do as a Senator is introduce an amendment to the Constitution that would impose term limits.

That's one route... :)

But, don't THE CONGRESSMEN get to vote on that?

[Kludge]

Rand Paul said the first thing he would do as a Senator is introduce an amendment to the Constitution that would impose term limits.

That's one route... :)

So Ron Paul would be out....? What's he on, his 10th or 11th term?

[JoshLowry]

So Ron Paul would be out....? What's he on, his 10th or 11th term?

Not sure how they would word it.

I don't think other people would vote for it if they were fired immediately.

Maybe make the clock start once it passes.

[Kludge]

Not sure how they would word it.

I don't think people would vote for it if they were fired immediately.

Maybe make the clock start once it passes.

Ahh... Grandfathering them in. Okay, that would be fair, I think.

I imagine there'd be a good bit of public outrage toward congress critters not willing to give into term limits, so I think, were there legislation taken up by grassroots activists and thrust into public discussion, there'd be a fair chance of it passing.

[mczerone]

I don't see why term limits are good. If we are going to have politicians running things, wouldn't it be better to elect one good person to the job, than to be forced to going through the entire election process every few years?

How would we have "11 term Congressman Ron Paul"?

Sure, it seems nice to automatically 'throw the bums out', but term limits just ensure that the line for the bums to get in is always long and competitive - as there are so many fewer incumbents.

[micahnelson]

When the people start electing new congressmen, the old one's terms will be limited.

Why do we need a law prohibiting our election options. If people can't be trusted to vote out a bad representative every 8 years or so- why do we trust them to vote in a new Rep every 8 years.

Education is the natural term limiter.

[awake]

State, municipal, village / town, household, and individual succession. Write this in the constitution and you would render term limits at the individuals preference.

[justinc.1089]

I think term limits would be good, but not nearly as good as most people act like. I think if you somehow got rid of the current crowd and got an entirely new crowd elected today the new one would end up about the same as the old one.

But still, it would do some good like getting rid of arrogant politicians that know they will always win their next election and the crap that follows with that. And voters would be forced to learn information about new candidates more often therefore forcing them to do at least a tiny bit of reading about candidates instead of voting for a name they have seen before.

[SelfTaught]

I don't see why term limits are good. If we are going to have politicians running things, wouldn't it be better to elect one good person to the job, than to be forced to going through the entire election process every few years?

Well, it never works out like that.

What's positive about term limits is that it engages the citizens to think a little more come election time, instead of lazily voting back the incumbents.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Well, it never works out like that.

What's positive about term limits is that it engages the citizens to think a little more come election time, instead of lazily voting back the incumbents.

Half the people vote down party lines. People over-estimate how much this would actually accomplish. I believe you get what you vote for. The establishment will continue to parade around empty vassals, and the electorate will continue to vote party. I don't really see how much this changes, personally. Use the political capital to actually get something that will make a difference.

[awake]

Reducing term limits would simply accelerate the looting. The corrupt would have less time to use other peoples property in his own interests.

[LDA]

The reason we need term limits is not simply to get "new blood" into Congress. The real problem with having no term limits is that representatives are perpetually running for re-election. They spend most of their time trying to get re-elected. The shy away from hard issues because they don't want to lose their seat.

Term limits could make it so politicians are less worried about getting re-elected, and more worried about doing what's right.